Journal of International Law & Human Rights

The Role of Institutional Investors in Shaping Market Confidence in Lens of Transparency and Accountability in Corporate Governance

2025-09-27T04:02:44+00:00

This study examines how institutional investors influence the market confidence in reestablishing transparency and accountability in corporate governance. It evaluates the impact of institutional investors on governance disclosure practices, accountability mechanisms, and the existence of regulatory gaps on market trust. It is through a synthesis of theory and practical policy implications. This study employs a comparative approach, utilising documentary analysis. It conducts a comparative study of the role of institutional investors in Pakistan and the EU, contrasting BlackRock’s proactive, ESG-driven climate advocacy with Vanguard’s passive engagement strategy to illustrate divergent stewardship models. This paper finds that institutional investors can significantly strengthen governance standards; however, their ability to effect change is often hindered by conflicting fiduciary interests, weak stewardship protocols, and inconsistent enforcement of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) requirements, particularly in emerging markets. Limitations that have been identified as major concerns include the lack of homogeneous disclosure rules, the absence of provisions for avoiding conflicts of interest, and the limited options for utilising collective shareholder action. The work suggests specific policy changes, such as the introduction of compulsory principles of stewardship, converged ESG reporting standards, and innovative ways of active and passive investor participation in governance.

The Impact of Climate Change on International Legal Frameworks: Ideas with Reference to Pakistan

2025-10-02T05:53:20+00:00

This article examines the impact of climate change on international legal frameworks, with a specific focus on Pakistan's vulnerability and the challenges it faces in addressing climate-induced impacts. Despite contributing minimally to global emissions, Pakistan is highly susceptible to the adverse effects of climate change, including water scarcity, agricultural disruptions, and extreme weather events. The study assesses the effectiveness of existing international climate agreements, such as the Paris Agreement and the UNFCCC, in supporting Pakistan’s climate goals and identifies the gaps in legal frameworks that hinder effective implementation. Key findings reveal that while international treaties provide a foundation for climate action, challenges such as limited financial resources, insufficient institutional capacity, and the lack of binding enforcement mechanisms continue to undermine Pakistan’s ability to meet its climate targets. Additionally, the study highlights the need for climate justice, emphasising the disproportionate impact on developing countries and the necessity for reparations from developed nations. The research also explores the intersection of climate change and human rights law, with a focus on the protection of vulnerable communities. The article concludes with recommendations for legal reforms, including the establishment of a binding climate reparations mechanism, revising the Indus Water Treaty, and enhancing regional cooperation to address transboundary climate issues. Ultimately, the study recommends the establishment of stronger international legal frameworks to improve Pakistan’s climate resilience and sustainable development.

Regulating Online Dispute Resolution and Artificial Intelligence in Pakistan: Legal Reforms for E-Commerce and Gig Workers Protection

2025-10-15T13:05:05+00:00

As Pakistan undergoes a digital transformation in e-commerce and labor, the absence of a regulatory framework for Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) poses significant challenges to equitable access to justice. This research critically examines the legal vacuum surrounding ODR in Pakistan, particularly in relation to consumer disputes and the rights of gig workers, where informal digital labor lacks institutional protection. Despite global advances in digital dispute mechanisms, Pakistan remains hindered by outdated laws, procedural inflexibility, and institutional fragmentation, rather than a lack of technology or user demand. By adopting a doctrinal research methodology, the study scrutinizes statutory instruments such as the Electronic Transactions Ordinance 2002, the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016, and provincial consumer protection laws. It also targets international models, including Singapore’s Community Justice and Tribunals System, the EU’s Digital Services Regulation, and India’s ODR Policy Plan 2023. The analysis applies disciplined frameworks of legal pluralism and algorithmic fairness to assess statutory precision, institutional volume, and procedural addition. Findings reveal that Pakistan’s current legal architecture inadequately supports digital dispute resolution, particularly for marginalized users. The study proposes a phased reform strategy encompassing the enactment of a dedicated ODR statute, statutory amendments, platform accountability, gig worker protection and AI transparency. These reforms are positioned not merely as legal necessities but as democratic imperatives for digital justice. The directions include empirical research on user experiences, Islamic legal compatibility and regional legal harmonization. This research contributes to the South Asian discourse on digital justice and offers a policy roadmap for Pakistan’s overdue ODR reform.

Witness Protection Laws: The Missing Link in Pakistan’s Criminal Prosecution System — A Comparative Study of India, UK and the USA

2025-11-09T10:32:33+00:00

The absence of complete protection for witnesses and a properly secure witness protection system has, within the realm of criminal prosecution, led the rest of the world, particularly Pakistan, to term it a ‘major missing link’ error. This blunder gives birth to a frost-bitten environment where intimidation of witnesses becomes the daunting ‘hostile’ issue, coupled with, and resulting in, abysmally low prosecution rates in critical crimes such as terrorism and organized crime. With respect to what the study has found, the ‘constitution’ of the set federal laws is primitive, overly divided, and punishing as opposed to protective. On the contrary, provincial acts appear dysfunctional due to a lack of funding, split lack of will, and a condition of institutional paralysis, coordination, and political spiritedness in tackling an issue. Analyzing and comparing developing countries, Pakistan does share the tiered ‘Witness Protection Scheme’ with India, along with the United States of America with its complete WITSEC, as well as the ‘Special Measures’ provided in a court of the United Kingdom. These models